NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 vs NVIDIA N1 16SM Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark measurements for the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 and the NVIDIA N1 16SM. The RTX 5090 has a full suite of recorded scores, while the N1 16SM has no benchmark entries in the database. This absence of comparative data means a direct score-by-score analysis is not possible.

For the RTX 5090, the recorded benchmarks show a consistent pattern of high performance. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, it records a score of 18355. Geekbench results show 334370 in OpenCL and 376728 in Vulkan. The Passmark suite reports 39650 in G3D, 26756 in GPU compute, and lower legacy scores: 226 in DirectX 10, 341 in DirectX 11, 185 in DirectX 12, and 395 in DirectX 9. The G2D score is 1413.

The N1 16SM has no recorded benchmark scores, so no wins can be attributed to either side in a head-to-head comparison. The RTX 5090's average benchmark score is 79842, placing it in the 92nd percentile of all GPUs. The N1 16SM shows a 50th percentile rating with an average score of zero, reflecting the absence of measurement data.

The nearest rivals for the RTX 5090 provide context for its average score. The NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB sits 0.3% lower with an average score of 79605. The Tesla P100 PCIe 12 GB is 0.6% behind at 79396. The AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT trails by 1.1% with 78940. On the upper side, the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X leads by 1.4% with 80959. These deltas are small, indicating the RTX 5090's average score clusters tightly with these products.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 5090 wins in every measurable category because it is the only product with recorded data. Its strengths appear across all benchmark types. The Vulkan score of 376728 exceeds the OpenCL score of 334370, showing strong cross-API performance. The Passmark G3D score of 39650 combined with the GPU compute score of 26756 indicates balanced rendering and compute capabilities.

The N1 16SM cannot claim any benchmark wins due to missing data. Its 50th percentile rating, however, places it at the median of all GPUs in the database, which suggests it holds a mid-range position despite the lack of scores. Its average benchmark score of zero is a placeholder, not a performance measurement.

In terms of where each product would apply, the RTX 5090's recorded benchmarks point toward high-end rendering tasks. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 18355 and the Passmark DirectX 12 score of 185 both reflect modern API workloads. The DirectX 9 score of 395 and DirectX 11 score of 341 show backward compatibility with older workloads.

The N1 16SM, by design, targets a different segment. Its specification profile, detailed below, suggests an integrated graphics processor (IGP) role. The absence of benchmarks in the database means its application profile must be inferred from its architecture and memory configuration rather than measured performance.

Architecture Differences

Both products use the Blackwell 2.0 architecture and are fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The similarity ends there.

The RTX 5090 uses the GB202 chip with 92,200 million transistors on a die size of 750 mm². The transistor density is 122.9 million per mm². The N1 16SM uses the GB20B chip with an unknown transistor count and a die size of 382 mm². The smaller die area and unknown transistor count indicate a less complex design.

Clock speeds differ substantially. The RTX 5090 has a base clock of 2017 MHz and a boost clock of 2407 MHz. The N1 16SM has a base clock of 741 MHz and a boost clock of 2346 MHz. The RTX 5090's base clock is nearly three times higher, while the boost clocks are closer.

The memory subsystems are fundamentally different. The RTX 5090 uses 32 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 512-bit bus, delivering 1.79 TB/s of bandwidth. The N1 16SM uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 273.2 GB/s. The RTX 5090 has 6.5 times the bandwidth, while the N1 16SM has four times the capacity.

Compute resources are heavily skewed toward the RTX 5090. It has 21760 shading units, 680 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 176 render output units (ROPs). The N1 16SM has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. The RTX 5090 has 10.6 times the shading units, 5.3 times the TMUs, and 7.3 times the ROPs.

Ray tracing and tensor core counts follow the same pattern. The RTX 5090 has 170 ray tracing cores and 680 tensor cores. The N1 16SM has 16 ray tracing cores and 64 tensor cores. The RTX 5090 has 10.6 times the ray tracing cores and 10.6 times the tensor cores.

The API support also differs. The RTX 5090 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The N1 16SM reports N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan. This suggests the N1 16SM may not target traditional graphics APIs in the same way.

FAQ

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each product?

A: The RTX 5090 has an average benchmark score of 79842, while the N1 16SM has an average score of 0 due to no recorded benchmarks.

Q: How do the memory capacities compare?

A: The RTX 5090 has 32 GB of GDDR7 memory, while the N1 16SM has 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory. The N1 16SM has four times the capacity.

Q: What are the memory bandwidth figures?

A: The RTX 5090 achieves 1.79 TB/s on a 512-bit bus, while the N1 16SM achieves 273.2 GB/s on a 256-bit bus. The RTX 5090's bandwidth is 6.5 times higher.

Q: Which product has more shading units?

A: The RTX 5090 has 21760 shading units, while the N1 16SM has 2048. This is a 10.6 times difference in favor of the RTX 5090.

Q: What process node do both products use?

A: Both the RTX 5090 and the N1 16SM are fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC.

Q: What is the percentile ranking for each product?

A: The RTX 5090 ranks in the 92nd percentile of all GPUs, while the N1 16SM ranks in the 50th percentile.

Specification Differences

| Specification | RTX 5090 | N1 16SM |

|---|---|---|

| Chip | GB202 | GB20B |

| Die Size | 750 mm² | 382 mm² |

| Transistors | 92,200 million | unknown |

| Base Clock | 2017 MHz | 741 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2407 MHz | 2346 MHz |

| Memory Size | 32 GB | 128 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR7 | LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bus | 512 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 1.79 TB/s | 273.2 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 21760 | 2048 |

| TMUs | 680 | 128 |

| ROPs | 176 | 24 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 170 | 16 |

| Tensor Cores | 680 | 64 |

| Pixel Rate | 423.6 GPixel/s | 56.30 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 1,636.8 GTexel/s | 300.3 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 104.8 TFLOPS | 9.609 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 104.8 TFLOPS (1:1) | 9.609 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 575 W | unknown |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | 1x 16-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 950 W | null |

| Display Outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1b | 1x HDMI |

| DirectX Support | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | N/A |

| OpenGL Support | 4.6 | N/A |

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | N/A |

| Dimensions | 304 mm x 137 mm x 40 mm | null |

| Release Date | 2025-01-29 | 2026-05-31 |

| Launch MSRP | 1,999 USD | null |

The Verdict

The data presents two products with entirely different positioning. The RTX 5090 is a fully measured, high-performance discrete graphics card. Its average benchmark score of 79842 places it in the 92nd percentile, with nearest rivals within 1.4% of its average score. The recorded benchmarks span modern and legacy APIs, and the specification sheet shows a complete, high-end implementation.

The N1 16SM is an integrated graphics processor with no recorded benchmarks. Its 50th percentile ranking and zero average score reflect the absence of measurement data, not a performance verdict. The specification sheet shows a different design philosophy: 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory with 273.2 GB/s bandwidth, a 256-bit bus, and 2048 shading units. The die size of 382 mm² is roughly half the RTX 5090's 750 mm², and the TDP is listed as unknown, consistent with an IGP form factor.

From the recorded data, the RTX 5090 wins every measurable performance category. It has 10.6 times the shading units, 10.6 times the ray tracing cores, and 10.6 times the tensor cores compared to the N1 16SM. Its FP32 performance of 104.8 TFLOPS is 10.9 times the N1 16SM's 9.609 TFLOPS. The pixel rate of 423.6 GPixel/s is 7.5 times higher, and the texture rate of 1,636.8 GTexel/s is 5.4 times higher.

The choice between these products depends on the workload. The RTX 5090 suits applications requiring maximum compute throughput, high bandwidth, and full API support. Its PCIe 5.0 x16 interface, dual-slot design, and 575 W TDP indicate a dedicated graphics solution. The N1 16SM, with its IGP form factor, no power connectors, and 128 GB of memory, targets a different role where large memory capacity matters more than raw rendering speed. Its 8.5 Gbps effective memory clock and 273.2 GB/s bandwidth are modest, but the capacity is unmatched.

The release dates reinforce the generational gap. The RTX 5090 launched on 2025-01-29 with a 1,999 USD launch MSRP. The N1 16SM is slated for 2026-05-31 with no launch MSRP recorded. The RTX 5090 has a successor listed as GeForce 60, while the N1 16SM has no successor or predecessor.

For users requiring measured performance, the RTX 5090 is the only option with recorded data. For users prioritizing memory capacity in an integrated form factor, the N1 16SM offers a configuration the RTX 5090 cannot match. The database contains no direct comparison scores, so any selection must weigh the RTX 5090's extensive benchmark record against the N1 16SM's unmeasured but architecturally distinct profile.